I thought Eliezer might have done better getting through to Frank by making a comparison, not to Tolkien but to other mythologies. For example, Norse mythology is a lot of fun, and I will probably even read it to my kids when I have some. If I do so, then whatever good morals there are in those stories can be emphasized, and whatever bad ones there are may either be skipped or looked upon as history lessons. Pithy phrases and metaphors from the books may be freely used as literary tropes.
If Frank only wants to do that with the Bible, I suppose that would be all right (with a few caveats). But I don’t think that’s what he has in mind when he speaks of “drawing meaning” from holy books.
Frank’s sophisticated Christians, for example, are going a lot further than merely saying “This mythology appeals to me on a cultural/aesthetic level,” as evidenced (i.a.) by their unwillingness to use words like “mythology” and “false.”
It’s basically a shell game, a credulity-laundering operation. The public gets “sophisticated” flummery about metaphor and meaning, and in the privacy of their homes, their children are handed the old prejudices as heirlooms.
their children are handed the old prejudices as heirlooms.
I observe that most of these ‘old prejudices’ are actually the prejudices made up a hundred or two years ago, not necessarily the ones from actual religious texts. “What the Bible says” seems more often to be “what grandma says”, as can be seen clearly when you quote out of favour moral exhortations from the bible at Christians.
I just watched this BHTV.
I thought Eliezer might have done better getting through to Frank by making a comparison, not to Tolkien but to other mythologies. For example, Norse mythology is a lot of fun, and I will probably even read it to my kids when I have some. If I do so, then whatever good morals there are in those stories can be emphasized, and whatever bad ones there are may either be skipped or looked upon as history lessons. Pithy phrases and metaphors from the books may be freely used as literary tropes.
If Frank only wants to do that with the Bible, I suppose that would be all right (with a few caveats). But I don’t think that’s what he has in mind when he speaks of “drawing meaning” from holy books.
Frank’s sophisticated Christians, for example, are going a lot further than merely saying “This mythology appeals to me on a cultural/aesthetic level,” as evidenced (i.a.) by their unwillingness to use words like “mythology” and “false.”
It’s basically a shell game, a credulity-laundering operation. The public gets “sophisticated” flummery about metaphor and meaning, and in the privacy of their homes, their children are handed the old prejudices as heirlooms.
I observe that most of these ‘old prejudices’ are actually the prejudices made up a hundred or two years ago, not necessarily the ones from actual religious texts. “What the Bible says” seems more often to be “what grandma says”, as can be seen clearly when you quote out of favour moral exhortations from the bible at Christians.